If its so snazzy then you would be doing it.Anonymous wrote:Let me tell you a little bit about CPS. Like I mentioned on another thread, the average salary is $76k + benefits. The crossing guards, who work shorter stints than DC crossing guards at around 3 hours a day, make $18k for the school year. Pretty snazzy.
Their wages have not been frozen, they are getting wages with no money to pay for them, they are basically "tenured" it is a protected position. In order to be fired, one must fail to improve through 2-three month long review processes. Cheating the system is quite easy, and most if they are unable to avoid impending termination, quit so they may get a job in another school district. The repercussions for poor performance are virtually nonexistent. Much of the teachers grading is based off of self-evaluations. It's a joke.
Chicago has 22k public employees, yet the crime is awful, the schools are horrible, recycling is picked up once every 2 weeks, and many of the streets suck. Yet don't try to operate an illegal valet service or park your food truck within 100 ft. of a restaurant, you will get shut down right away!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You do understand that a deficit is caused when the funds allocated do not cover expenses, right? So why is the logical response to a deficit to increase class size, rather than allocate more money to schools?
Why are the schools spending more? I bet there are a lot of wasted materials, a lot of overtime for staff, crappy bus drivers that crash buses, etc etc that add to the cost. You can't throw money at the problems to make them go away, you need to fix the problem.
I think a guy from Chicago said something about going through every line of the budget-maybe they should do that in chicago and find out where they are wasting money.
Anonymous wrote:You do understand that a deficit is caused when the funds allocated do not cover expenses, right? So why is the logical response to a deficit to increase class size, rather than allocate more money to schools?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A reporter in Chicago was on NPR this morning. She said that the teachers were upset about the working conditions and not the money. They would readily accept the 16% increase in salary over four years. The school environment, lack of resources, terrible buildings, additional hours, etc. that haunts the teachers regarding the new contract conditions.
Or, they could accept a pay freeze like other federal gov't employees and request that the resulting money go toward improving their resources and schools.
Anonymous wrote:A reporter in Chicago was on NPR this morning. She said that the teachers were upset about the working conditions and not the money. They would readily accept the 16% increase in salary over four years. The school environment, lack of resources, terrible buildings, additional hours, etc. that haunts the teachers regarding the new contract conditions.
Anonymous wrote:A reporter in Chicago was on NPR this morning. She said that the teachers were upset about the working conditions and not the money. They would readily accept the 16% increase in salary over four years. The school environment, lack of resources, terrible buildings, additional hours, etc. that haunts the teachers regarding the new contract conditions.